An Optimization Approach to the Preventive Maintenance Planning Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creating a good preventive maintenance schedule is essential to perform an efficient shutdown. This paper is presenting a mathematical non-linear model that is formulated for the turnaround maintenance scheduling problem, and proposing an algorithmic optimization approach that combines the scheduling and workforce allocation in one phase. The strategy used here mainly aims to filter the uncompleted tasks from the tasks set and then to filter again from the resulted uncompleted tasks the ones which are satisfying the precedence constraint. If a task is not completed because of its preceding task, then it is put under hold until the precedence is finished. Once these two conditions are satisfied, the allocation of processors (workers in departments) starts considering the available ones. The algorithmic optimization approach is based on customized objective function and a number of constraints. It is coded in MATLAB format and solved using a modified genetic solver. It provides an optimized or pseudo-optimized schedule and workforce allocation plan, saves time and effort, and as a consequence it improves the efficiency and effectiveness of the maintenance system. The efficiency of the proposed algorithm in terms of computation time is affected mostly by the number of assigned tasks and the branching density of the dependent tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".